-- well, it is not similar at all. earlier admitted the court transcripts from ms. flores' testimony gary >> we reserve on that but that is foreign testimony, correct? >> yes. you do not have to admit them. we do intend to submit them. then you can make a decision whether or not you want to admit them as admissible. >> under your scenario, would we get them in time to allow us to have the witness in person to reconcile the documentary offer for the previous interview transcript with live testimony?

if it came in late in the process, that could make it difficult. if we knew it was coming early on, it might signal that we wanted certain witnesses available. or we might feel that it did not trigger that and it was reconciled without them. >> i am not sure the question that you ask, but i can say that i will get the closing party and the commission, our exhibit list by the close of business tomorrow. chairperson hur: that would be great. if we could have objections by the end of friday. is that possible? >> i am a little confused and seeking clarification. in the scheduling conversations we had had with commissioner

hur, we discussed all together submitting a exhibits and a procedure whereby by today, both sides would submit the exhibits that did not come in through a declaration. that is what we have been prepared to submit. we only have four submissions. we have given to our evidence for declarations. it is unclear to me now if there is a whole new process where we are starting with objections to everybody's documents. are we just talking about this subset of documents or is the door wide open again? >> my understanding was that any documents -- any documentary evidence not submitted with the declaration that you intended to lose -- that you intended to use would be included on the exhibit list. i am proposing that we extend the deadline until tomorrow

because it sounds like there were some technical difficulties and there are some telephone records that needed redacting. perhaps that can all be done and we can have these lists in a complete form by the end of the day tomorrow. that is my point. by friday, i would like to see -- or monday, if that is too soon for it. the process i thought we were discussing if you would meet and confer, stipulate to those documents which there was no objection. if there were objections, there would be submitted so we would be able to rule on them. >> is the commission going to entertain objections to a -- two documents attached to declarations you have are the reviewed? or is that topic close now? >> if we have sustained an objection to a paragraph that includes an exhibit, that

document is out. >> would there be a second chance to object to other exhibits in the same declaration that has party -- that had already been considered? chairperson hur: i was not anticipating that. i think we are all talking about the same thing. please let me know if we are not. >> i am not, in any way, criticizing. it is just difficult to get clarity later if i do not have it today. >> we will endeavor to is to a press release that summarizes all of our decisions today. >> there is one documentary submission that we gave notice of and that is that we will be ultimately submitting some of sheriff mirkarimi under the party admission rule. i want to wait until he testifies because our submission after he testifies would be

smaller than it would be before he testifies. that is, if he is going to testify. there is no need to submit public statements that reflect those facts. what i would like to do is wait until after he has testified to submit those admissions. chairperson hur: i would like to allow a mr.kopp and mr. wagner to address that. chairperson hur: that is fine -- >> that is fine with us. chairperson hur: ok. that is fine by me. >> this chair will be called by you and your case and chief. is it agreeable, mr. kopp, that you or whenever council is handling it, are you going to wait and put him on when you put

your case on? >> we will do it at the same time. chairperson hur: in that case, we would allow some leeway on the redirect. >> the objections to the exhibits will be submitted by the end of the day tomorrow are due when? chairperson hur: the objections should be due by monday. the 25th. again, the point is to give you guys a chance to stipulate where stipulation is opprobrious so that we do not have to deal with an objection every single exhibit. is that acceptable to the commission? anything else that we need to deal with? >> not on our part. thank you. >> nothing for us.

>> i do not think so. chairperson hur: commissioners, do we need a motion to adopt the interim decisions that we made throughout the evening? >> it is a custom. you do not need it but you usually do it. chairperson hur: is there a motion to adopt the evidentiary and scheduling decisions that the commission has made drug the course of the evening? >> so moved. chairperson hur: all in favor. opposed. there being none, the meeting is adjourned.

>> it is 5:38, and the meeting is being called to order. if you could turn off all cellphone and pagers. public comment will be taken on each item. roll call.

goo[roll-call] mr. president, we have forum. >> next item. >> you are out of approval of the minutes and the may 7, 2012,. >> do we have a motion? >> i move. >> second. >> all in favor. but that motion passes with five

votes. >> item 3, as part of the city employee recognition program. >> thank you, commissioners. this is a good one year ago and i want to a knowledge of treasurer -- this is a good one. i want to acknowledge the treasurer and the things his office shows and to your streamlining the permitting process. it is making life easy for the business owners in this town, and i want to thank you for abouthat.

we would not be here without these innovative ideas. i have been too many meetings where you did a presentation on the new permitting fees and structures, and to small business owners, it is going to be a shock at first, but i know at the monthly meetings and some of the meetings i attended, people are not free of doubt by this, and the way you presented to this formula -- are not freaked out by this and the way you present it, you made its move. -- made its move. you are everything a city employee should be commo, so i k

you for that. i know you wanted to say a few words. >> thank you very much. i am for a proud to be here to join you in recognizing the great work being done by my colleague. he is an incredibly good worker, and i am not going to steal your thunder in terms of the accomplishments he performs. just to say we are very pleased with the opportunity we get to work with him on a regular basis, but i want to recognize the good work of this commission and the role we play in the city. and we do a lot of out reach across the city. that means we talked to a lot of small businesses, including some very small businesses. it is our job to work in

partnership with your commission and other partnerships to make it easy for small businesses to be successful and to be able to achieve their goals here in san francisco. we do that all the time. i look forward to working with you going forward. good thank you for this honor, and i turn it back to you, steve. >> you attended every small business week function, so thank you very much. the small business commission on this monday, june 11, 2012, the small business commission is proud to recognize the contribution to the office of

tax collector, the contributions you have made to the small- business community. through her leadership, the business licence consolidation project went from concept to reality and is currently being implemented with full implementation in march of 2013. this is a cheese realigning initiative supported by the small business commission and helps make -- this is a key realigning initiative supported by the small business commission. good = we are meeting with merct groups for the forthcoming changes, and you have made that smoothes for a lot of people, because i have not heard any complaints. people have said this is a positive thing, so that is awesome. these truly represent a city

employee dedicated to the service and a community she serves, so congratulations on behalf of the small business commission. [applause] >> nobody ever lets me say anything. thank you so much. i really enjoyed walkand working on this project. it was a great joy to be in the community and work with folks i get to visit. i hope to see you more. i know this project is going to open up new opportunities to continue to improve the way we work together and serve you, so thank you for giving me good feedback so we could do this in a way that was collaborative spirit of thank you very much

-- that was collaborative. thank you very much. >> i want to say a few words to acknowledge that from the beginning there was an enormous amount of moving parts for her to coordinate and deal with in addition to out leash, -- to outreach, and i want to reiterate the presentation you gave has been really clean and simple and easy to understand. it may initially it sound like, change is happening, it is very simple. but i want to thank you as well. >> putting a reflective material

over our windows and because we are takinbaking. they are just going to have to deal with me. >> thank you so much. >> next item. >> the next item will be continued to the next meeting but irecord. presentation of small-business certificate of honor to stephanie hui and for her

service during the 2012 school year. this will continue on july 9. item five, of general public comment. it allows members of the public to comment generally on matters within the commission's purview and suggest new agenda items for the commission's future consideration. >> do we have any comments or something that is not on the agenda? seeing none, public comment is closed. next item. >> item 6, discussion of possible actions to make recommendations on file 120523, transit impact to development fee increase and updates. in the back of the binder is a copy of the presentation, and we

have only showalicia from the pg department joining us. good >> good evening. i am here tonight to discuss a recently introduced ordinance, and if i could just get the overhead. this is the transit impact on development see. it provides funding to offset the impact of new development on the transit. this shows the currency, the

proposed fee under the ordinance, and the nexus establishes the total cost of impacts on the transit system and identifies how much each of land use would have to be charged to offset the cost. it usually cuts out around 68%. there are a few policy considerations of this commission may want to review, which i may bring out of front, but i will go into more detail. the first is the fee of date changes some of the terms and conditions that apply in order to make a more consistent with the planning code. the result is that it applies on a smaller scale to more uses

than is currently the case. under the transportation sustainability program, there is a policy credit program and established, which effectively offset some of the changes, and the commission may wish to consider recommending a policy program into this update. the net change would be a waiver for small businesses operating top to -- operating up to 2500 gross square feet. under the ordinance, it would apply to uses. there is a grandfathering period of to october 1. when that was first established,

the expectation was at the update would have been acted upon already by the board sometime this last spring, so the commission may wish to consider recommending an extension of their grandfathering period. the tfp is a proposal that would bring practices in a better alignment with policy objectives. it would allow the city to provide comprehensive citywide improvements and at the same time mitigates new development impacts on the transportation system. the enabling legislation was introduced along with the updates last month, but it requires an environmental impact report, so it is on hold until donthe eir is completed if you'a

good -- is completed. when is implemented, it would no longer be completed. state law requires we update the impact fees every five years. they did complete an actual study of state in 2011. -- an update in 2011. in the last eight years the costs to offset development has increased disproportionately to the cpi. good the way it has been applied and a fine has been inconsistent, so this offers an

opportunity to streamline administration of the fee. this was an outgrowth of the downtown plan enacted in the early 19 80's. there was a recommendation downtown would require additional servers to reuter when the downtown plan was adopted, the expectation was that it would serve as a commercial with office uses, and that has not entirely been the case. in 2001 they conducted a study, and that established an impact

on the transit system. an update broaden the application to some other commercial users along with citywide superio. many of the changes in the ordinance are consistent with what is being proposed with an important distinction it is not propose to apply for residential, sir to give you a little more of an idea of the changes under consideration today, some of the land use definitions have been changed to provide greater consistency.

the majority of impact fees are in the planning code, so there was not always a comprehensive tie back to the planning code, so in terms of specific changes, one is to provide ammonification that so find child care facilities here are your -- that defines a child care facilities. goothe of state also changes the definition of an abandoned use. it currently it applies in cases where the site has been inactive for more than five years. by tying the definition back to

the planning code, there is a modification the principal use those are never considered abandoned, but certain conditional users are considered abandoned after three years, so for certain projects there would never be a cab on the amount of time for every applying buffi-- for reapplyinge fee. when we have nonconforming uses, typically those are not conforming for a reason, so they undergo an additional scrutiny under the planning process triggered it also clarified as it is calculated on of gross square footage basis. however, the wording makes it more explicit.

it also provides conditions for use. this as one of project comes in as a restaurant, and the way this would apply and practices is different project came in with a change in use and the underlying use had a change in impacts less than the new use, the difference would apply according to the different kinds of uses, so the pressure is to capture only the net increase, and finally, the exchange recommends it does establish a hundred gross square feet -- 800 gross square feet. this was something that was established during the planning department's efforts to develop

a plan and went through analysis. currently it exempts projects from paying the fee if they are coming at 300 square feet or record is changes that. again, tdifs were to adopt a policy plan, that would change the fee in terms of how it would be applied. in terms of application, it extends to certain uses of that have been exempted. it would apply to nonprofit and institutional uses. goothere was a comprehensive eft to understand who the developments.